Masterton

The reason why the cable news networks gave him "ridiculous amounts of airtime for free" (did they charge the Clinton campaign for airtime?), was two fold. Firstly, he was good for ratings and they cashed in on his popularity/unpopularity. Secondly, being that they were mostly all in the tank for Clinton/Democrats, they believed he would not win. How wrong they were. If Trump ran as a Democrat, they MSM would not have attacked him the way they did, promoting pseudo events and hoaxes in order to try and discredit his policies and popularity and/or lying and covering up for his opponent. The MSM has a history of attacking Republicans, it is not something unique to Trump. But Trump was the first one to fight back and call them out on it. The fact that you "would definitely believe MSM stories" is self evident, but we're all still waiting for evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians... 🙄

Not sure he made up the tag MSM, but he was certainly the first 'mainstream' person to use the term 'fake news', which is basically a simplified way of stating that the media create pseudo events and then use them as an excuse to slander people. I completely disagree that Trump drew first blood, in fact Trump was the first person to stand up to the dishonest media and fight back. The media mercilessly attacked Trump from the moment he declared he was running for President, mainly because he committed the cardinal sin of running as a Republican. If Trump ran as a Democrat, he would be their darling.

Why are you still persisting with this? Firstly, I pointed out to another low-information fake news consuming sufferer, who posted a link entitled "Trump vows to expand Muslim ban if he wins presidency", that THERE WAS NEVER ANY MUSLIM BAN. It was a dishonest headline, and that was the point that I made. Especially as I pointed out that nowhere in the article did it attribute any of Trump's claims or quotes to specifically banning Muslims. Typical fake news. Secondly, you injected yourself into the situation by claiming rather ridiculously that the article in question said "nothing about a ban on all Muslims" when it was literally how the article was framed with the headline, and it was in reference to the headline posted that I was responding. I am not letting anything "misguide me as to reality", as I am the one pointing out the reality.

Yes, I am fully aware that purveyors of fake news propaganda and anti Trump conspiracy theories "commonly" refer to the travel ban as a "Muslim ban", that is the whole point... And no, it is not "more accurately called a Muslim travel ban", and no, it (a Muslim ban) did not happen. A travel ban comprising several countries which were failed states or associated with terrorism were on the list, the fact that a lot of them were Muslim majority is completely irrelevant. Just as the fact that some of the countries were in Africa is irrelevant. Unless you are implying that all Muslims are terrorists? Interesting... 🙄 Interesting too how the the worlds top 6 most populous Muslim countries, comprising approx 1 BILLION Muslims, mysteriously did not appear on the travel ban? Wierd..... 🙄 But yeah sure, a "Muslim travel ban" happened....

Just curious if you are actually aware of the bill in question? It does nothing to solve the border issue, unless you think legalizing illegal immigration and speeding up the process by which fake asylum seekers can become citizens constitutes "solving the border issue" ?? The bill is a total disaster, regardless of who wrote it and who did or didn't vote for it. Furthermore the bill is totally unneccessary as the president can solve or worsen what is going on at the border by exectutive order, no bill is needed. Howabout he start by enforcing existing law? Just a suggestion.

Apart from the fact that part of the title of the article literally says "Trump pledges to ban Muslims from the U.S".... Seems you missed that part? The point which you clearly (or deliberately?) missed is that another low-information poster with TDS referenced a "Muslim ban" (which never existed and is fake news Democrat propaganda,) and then linked to a silly Guardian hitpiece which again is literally titled "Trump vows to expand Muslim ban". This type of reporting, and the repeating of it on this forum, is inaccurate and dishonest and you all know it. But you support and promote it and look the other way because it ties in with the whole BS Trump bad and Biden good narrative.

No, you are the one quoting and propagating pseudo events. The point that you clearly missed is that there was never any "muslim ban", it is and always was a fake narrative to discredit Trump amongst Muslim voters. Nowhere in any of the quotes or actual facts does it say anything about specifically banning Muslims. This is 2017 era propaganda, I don't need to 'keep up' with it.

Well the difference is that Trump had the authority to take the documents, and the clearance to de-classify them whereas Biden and Clinton did not. Wierd how the Dems always gloss over that inconvenient little fact as it completely contradicts their narrative. Here we go again with this... When the judge asked that hypothetical question, the lawyers stated (and I am paraphrasing...) that there would be a process to follow whereby the president would need to be impeached first and then convicted in the senate before any "prosecution" took place. If you're going to cherry pick facts to argue a point, at least present them in the correct context.

What a ridiculous post. Are you living in Bizarro World ?? Your post contains nothing but fake news Democrat propaganda talking points. Good grief... try removing yourself from the Democrat controlled media and educate yourself. Denying the validity of elections? Oh you mean like your side STILL do with the 2000 election? And the 2016 election? Trum colluded with the Russians right? 🤣 The Stacy Abrams governership election? Claiming permanent immunity from prosecution for all crimes committed while in office? It is a fact that the president has immunity, it is not a "claim", furthermore Trump did not commit any crimes, and as with most fake talking points, the clip you refer to about the Seal team assasinating his rival was a hypothetical question asked by a judge. Trump has made it clear he doesn't respect democracy and elections, and wants to be immune from all prosecution for his crimes? Absolutely clueless. Tell me, how many supreme court decisions did Trump ignore? And how many has Biden ignored? Yet it's Trump who doesn't respect democracy... Please... go off and educate yourself, and then come back and argue with the grown-ups.

Posts a link about a non-existent Muslim ban from The Guardian (🤣) in a thread about a conspiracy theory and then expects to be taken seriously... 🙄

Thai people also tend to refer to their age as a year more than it is due to them referring to their age as the age they are turning in any particular year. A seventeen year old in their eighteenth year will consider themselves eighteen. Again this is something that you learn with time, it is unlikely a tourist would know this.

Lots of people are in denial about this fact. They assume that because Thai girls generally look younger than their age, then they must therefore be of legal age but just look young. When you have been here long enough, you can spot them a mile away, in the same way you learn to spot a LB a mile away. In the past, I would often be the aforementioned bar and spot a clearly not-yet-18 yr old and ask the mamasan, how old is she? "Nineteen". How old is she really, I would then ask, raising my eyebrows at her. "Sixteen". Completely agree. Too many people in this thread going out of their way to signal their virtue. Assuming that the guy in the article went with the girls knowing they were not of legal age or actively sought them out. There is zero evidence of this. But lets break out the torches and pitchforks at dawn. Methink they doth protest too much...

Funny how some on here automatically assume he has fallen on hard times and actually needs a plane ticket. Most of these types are scam artists praying on the genorisity of other people (mostly Thais) to fund their 'stay' in Thailand. Personally I find 'begpackers' despicable and give foreigners here a bad name.

How nice and boringly predictable that the TDS sufferers on this forum have emerged from beneath their fake news enshrouded rocks to honour us with their presence. Yes yes, orange man bad.... bla bla bla yawn... The more things change, the more they stay the same.....

Well that explains where all the 50b notes have gone and why there are so few in circulation...

Agree, Great White's version was great (lol) but the song was actually originally written and sung by Ian Hunter in the 70's